[NABS-L] board position 4

[Elizabeth Mohnke]

Hello All,

I commend Kathryn for her leadership as the President of the National Association of Blind Students. However, there was definitely a better way to conduct the elections for the fourth board position.

There was opposition to Kathryn appointing someone to this position. However, it was strongly shot down by Kathryn who appeared to be tired, inpatient, and authoritative. I felt as though the way this opposition was shot down was wrong as every member has the right to voice their opinion. I imagine between the sheer shock of the authoritative decision for Kathryn to appoint someone to this board position along with the strong opposition to the one person who tried to argue against this decision made it rather difficult for anyone else to oppose Kathryn as this decision was being made.

The elections for the National Association of Blind Students is often controversial. Therefore, it would have been wise to give extra consideration for holding these elections in a virtual environment. But it sounded as though the procedures for conducting elections were created by Kathryn alone. If this organization is truly a democratic organization, then no single person should be making any major decisions that involves the membership without giving all members a chance to voice their opinion on the matter.

There could have been other options considered for this board position that would have been less controversial. I remember there was a motion made and approved during the 2011 elections to drop all but the top two people running for the final board position after the first round of voting. I remember this taking place because I was in the running for this board position. I remember this being done because there were a lot of people running for this board position and it was starting to get very late. While some may argue this decision violated the election procedure outlined in the constitution, it appeared to be a reasonable compromise given the circumstances.

Additionally, there is only one year left for this board position. Therefore, leaving it vacant until next year or until a less controversial means of voting could be agreed upon and conducted could have been considered. However, there were no alternatives discussed or considered. Either you agreed with the option Kathryn was proposing, or you were in opposition of what Kathryn was proposing, and there did not appear to be any alternatives that met the approval of the President.

The code of conduct states that the organization is to provide an open and welcoming place for everyone. But this is not what I saw take place during the elections for the forth board position. Instead, it appeared as though there was an authoritative
 Leader enforcing their own will onto the membership of the organization. I did not voice my opinion during the meeting as I felt it would not have mattered and would not have changed the decision that was being made. I am neither a dues paying member or leader within this organization.

It is possible the way the elections for the fourth board position was handled may have long term consequences for the organization. This meeting was being conducted online for anyone to see. And it may have served as an example for those who believe the National Federation of the Blind is not the democratic organization that it claims to be. I was surprised that none of the national leaders provided any direction or oversight regarding the election for this board position. No one person should be above the organization.

Warm regards,,
Elizabeth